An open letter to the writer and senders of the ‘Punish a Muslim’ letter,

I’ll be honest as a fellow born-and-bred Yorkshire woman, I’ve always been told to speak my mind but remain polite. Yet I’m equally aware of how passionate and loud we can be on average, so this is going to be a difficult task. Bear with me.


I’m not going to do what others have done, condemning your letter outright, or calling it ‘disgusting’ and ‘sickening’, though in my opinion it is that too, of course. Instead, I’m here to have a conversation, over why you’d want to send letters out to Bradford, Leceister, London, Cardiff and your own hometown Sheffield. I say hometown, because the only identifier we have is that letters have the Sheffield postmark, indicating that they were sent from there. I’d especially like to highlight what a shoddy exercise in communication you’ve committed, and how once again Yorkshire faces some negative press, because well you couldn’t mind yourself. A quality of a truly respectful neighbour, in any part of the world but especially our home county.

But that aside, I’d like to start by thanking you for being so overtly racist, in fact. In a way that only those who’ve experienced the escalation from strange looks, patronisation, or disdain to outright verbal abuse and beatings, could ever truly know. But I’ve got some thoughts, (and heck even some pointers for you) if you really are hell bent on helping those who’ve suffered, and to stop people from somehow mutating into sheep. A hellish thought, not least for motorists on our narrow country lanes.


Firstly, clarity. I’m sure like the rest of us you were put through painfully long English classes on writing a good letter. The importance of addressing your audience, and to make the subject of your sentence clear. Perhaps you were even tested on it, I think even I was and I went to the worst school in Bradford at the time. But mate, I have to say you letter is confusing the hell out of me, who are you talking to? You open up with:

‘They have hurt you, they have made your loved ones suffer.
They have caused you pain and heartache’

But who exactly is the ‘they’ you mean? All muslims or only some. I ask simply because some of your letters were sent to muslim addresses and houses like Councillor Riaz Ahmed’s business address. The best word for this is ‘confusing’ right? Once it could have been a mistake, but many addresses and it’s confusion. Perhaps you’re wanting to reach out to some of these people to join in your game, or give them forewarning, both noble ideas. I hope someone in your collective (if it is that) has some conscience and was trying to do exactly this. The forewarning, not increasing the number of game players for popularity’s sake. I mean are you wanting your followers to punish some muslims and not others, to help prove they’re not sheep?


This leads me to my second point. You seem to be insulting the very people who you are wanting to play your “game”. The saying ‘catching more flies with honey…’ springs to mind, remember no-one ever played with the name-calling class bully.  But seriously, someone whose printed out letters on fancy paper, embedded a table and heck even put in two logos (including a crest) into a letter, has to see the irony in what you’ve done right?!

For clarity’s sake, I’ll make it clear – you’re asking them to not be sheep, to not ‘follow orders’ or be ‘easily led’ and then you’re leading them to do things for points. It’s just absurd. Especially as you’re not even coming forward to make it clear who you even are. We may be warm, open folk in Yorkshire but we’re not gullible enough to follow a shadowy someone who’s not even doing the courtesy of looking you in the eye, shaking your hand or buying you a pint/coffee. For some reasons ‘blind leading the blind’ echoes in my head.

Not to mention the fact that all of the acts you’re dictating are crimes, meaning there’s a high chance someone is going to jail. Knowing how these things play out it’ll be those who foolishly follow your ‘actions’,  but hey they can’t point to you as the leader of this nefarious plan can they? So no doubt they’ll go to prison and you’ll keep on hanging out in Sheffield or down in 102 Petty France, London (who knows?), leaving the poor daft one to suffer alongside their heartbroken, abandoned family because of they hurt they inflicted on another. Wonder if you’ll send another letter clarifying that it is now you, dear writer, who has inflicted the ‘pain and heartache’?


Now the third point, may sound trivial but it’s important, your game has a serious fundamental flaw, your scoring process. Seriously, when did you last play a game? Maybe, I hit the nail on the head earlier, by noting that many people don’t play with bullies, and considering your bullying tone, perhaps this is the reasons why you’ve created a seriously messed up game (in more ways than one!). But I can’t let this one alone, it bothers me something awful…

How can throwing acid on someone be worth less than beating them up? Similarly, how have torturing using electrocution be worth less than using a knife? I’ve read enough crime novels, and watched enough action and horror movies to know that there are some forms of violence that are easier than others.   Also, burning a mosque or bombing it is worth the same amount of points. Do you seriously not know how to value anything? Well I mean of course you don’t, you’re expecting people to take away another person’s life, as well as a significant portion of their own life, all to follow your seriously flawed “game”.


Finally, who is keeping score? Is there going to be a final scoreboard, a bit difficult considering your not exactly putting yourself forward as a ref, and shaking your player’s hands before setting them off to play a game for the day. By ‘day’ do you mean only during daylight hours, or is the night included too. No matter what you think about the premise of the movie “The Purge’, you have to give it to them they at least had the decency to create a structure, and to communicate it well, as well as allow open discussion and criticism. It is in this spirit that I’m putting myself out there to engage with you, as someone who didn’t receive the letter so can only assume I’m a target, but may well have considering some of my fellow muslims in Yorkshire and London did. Because I don’t want a Sharia led police state either, no I’ll be bolder I don’t want any form of police state, I want a democracy. But all democracies are built on ethics, open communication and due process, not badly engineered games, without effective scorekeeping and shady puppet-masters, so why not come forward for your democractic due process and I’ll buy you a cuppa, over which we can discuss the murkiness of your ideals and communication. Doesn’t that sound nice?


Kindest regards,


Mariam Kauser

Originally from Bradford, but currently on a short spell in London.


Tools of violence

Identity violence

Symbolic violence

Communication violence

Historic violence

Revisionist violence

Repetitive violence

Infantilising violence

Nostalgic violence

Communication violence

Prejudiced violence

Tiring violence

Destructive violence

Sexual violence

Gendered violence

Religious violence

Spiritual violence

Class violence

Linguistic violence

Colourist violence

Male violence

White male violence

Co-opting violence

Toxic violence

Co-opted toxic violence

Ideological violence

Paternalistic violence

Patriarchal violence

Symbolically patriarchal violence

Promotional violence

Just violence

Violence violence

Tiring violence

Too tired coz I’m broken and it’s the result of all the above and more violence

Mental violence

Inferred violence

Implicit violence

Bright-eyed violence

Broken souls violence

The once you had bright eyes but then you got co-opted and are stuck but still need peeps and I get it but don’t you get that I get it, so why you gotta erase the stuff we excavate and stop us entering and flinging open the doors-no revision check, not open the doors break all these fracking symbolic capitalistic colonial walls – so that we can all evolve together and your tired eyes can weep and rejoice in celebration with us all, bold beautiful and brave and bound to the forward March of completing our shared ancestors abolitionist principles and journeys to create a new fair fresh deprogrammed society so we keep being we and us, and you and me, happy and free together… urgh! Gah! For f***! *sigh* but you can’t and that’s violent, violence.

So instead here we stand. Ina pyramid and I keep trying to educate and create and collate and collaborate while we survive and you thrive but I don’t even cry coz I’m proud inside that at least someone who got one part of our ancestral spirit souls good side to the table where it’s all about whose there to dine, and whose outside… not about our fellow people who die and are also pushed towards pipelines to die. Whether quickly or slowly, that’s for us all to see with our eyes.

I’m too tired to speak, so I’ll leave it to that… and sleeps for the night.

Quick Note: Today’s roundup

So today’s readings have taken me from reading through 2011 working paper titled ‘Global Inequality: from Class to Location, from Proletarians to Migrants’ by Branko Milanovic (2011). A different formatted version can be found here, there may be some discrepancies. I then moved onto looking at the question of inequality in terms of mediation, visibility, and the issues of diversity/inclusion in a UK sense. I turned to watching video recordings of talks given to the UK Parliament, the world’s media stage, along side exploring diversity charters, policy documents and reports by the think tank Runnymede Trust.

I aim to provide a more in-depth note on the various reports and papers I read and media in due course. But suffice to say, in terms of my interest and research project I am alternating between the arena as being worth as one of global interest and one of individual structuring and construction. I see my domain of exploration as the later, but still find it hard to fully verbalise in a written manner what I am trying to etch out. However, in pushing myself to follow the unravelled thread to a neater package in the form of a more manageable project and location-specific data, I aim to combine a wider appreciation for the terrain, as well as using the populist methodological tendency to look at and the continuation a truly diverse and better serving community





Early morning meandering thoughts on race, desire and Garvey

Marking difference begets miscommunication, which breeds misunderstanding and could lead to feelings of contempt, hatred and hurt.

Yesterday’s class on colour, difference, browning and Jamaica was great and very, very interesting, not least of all because of a small breakout session as we discussed with our peers the question ; ‘How is mixing problematic in Jamaica..?’ (Or something along those lines. Realised the slides are not online! Must dash to email tutor).

There was the brief introduction to Marcus Garvey, his notion of acceptance for all people, but then the call for no miscegenation. 

But here’s my thought, like the moment you see colour or people as difference you eradicate desire and fragment a persons being and identity. Sure there is difference. Sure there is a long and troubling history with race. Also with empire. Definitely with the policing of bodies and of our desires. But you cannot, now, move one way or the other.

I’m not saying let’s not be proud of our culture or heritage. Or that those that want to actively create a stronger heritage or ‘keep it real’ by accessing and responding to the essentialism of Garvey are wrong.

I instead want the space for my desire, wherever you may think it has “come from”, to not be rendered problematic. When I see my love, or see the people I deem desirable, it is the person, the intellect, the knowledge and the entire person I find intriguing and comforting.

I’ve had too long a history of marking difference. As been seen as ‘Gorey’ as a child, as been seen as vain, vacuous, proud, the characteristics projected onto the race that kept the brown man down in working-class UK. When all I did was be happy and remain optimistic, make friends with whoever was nice and interesting, be they Shiahs (shock-horror), regular one of us people, white kids, fat kids, slow kids or whoever.. Seriously growing up in situations and navigating people’s misunderstanding and contempt for one another on skin-deep characteristics is a difficult way to live. I for one, don’t want the same for the next generation, or for my children..

Love and desire, just bring us out of thinking about ourselves as belong to camps.. Whether they’re constructed around whichever ideology, race, creed or gender.

There’s a lot we can take from Garvey and  other post-colonial thinkers, who bred the ground for our heritage and ancestral lands to salvage pieces of themselves. To create networks amongst themselves. Who gained strength after being raped, violated and contemptuously left to fend for themselves in a skewed world. One where the empiric rapist still held the cards, and the valuables, and the keys to representation.. But I cannot now advocate that strength is built on essentialising any of the racial categories. I know it will be a difficult road to navigate and there are inherent representation of race they highlights problems we need to address. But the heritage that we have, we consume, we produce, leads to a path that will take us to interact with many peoples. We just have to start at a place where we see it as that, fellow people not the breakdown of their parts, that we summarise without starting a dialogue. 

MA Gender Studies: – Week Six

Today I attended: 

Class: Theorising Gender; Theme: Poststructuralism, Deconstruction and Feminism | Karen Throsby

Encounters between feminism and poststructuralism have been intense and fruitful, but hotly contested. Many feminist scholars have argued that poststructuralist and deconstructionist approaches offer feminist theorising productive tools for the exploration of key issues in relation to power and knowledge, and that such approaches enable a questioning of some problematic assumptions of feminist scholarship. Other scholars, however, have denounced poststructuralism as incompatible with feminist theorising, affirming that it dangerously undermines the bases not only for feminist production of knowledge claims, but also for feminist social and political transformation. In this session, we will consider these debates and the profound effects they have had on the development of feminist theory.

Dissertation meeting one-on-one

Evening Seminar: CERS Public Lecture: The Afterlife of Black Sociology

Professor Barnor Hesse, Northwestern University, USA

Date: Monday 2nd November, 2015, 17:00 – 18:30
Location: Room 12.25, Social Sciences Building


This lecture provides a critical historical and analytical commentary on ‘racism’ as a concept rather than a self-evidential empirical phenomenon. It invites reconsideration of the 20th century genealogy of the racism concept prior to and in relation to its appropriation by American sociology. Central to this argument is that the western emergent formulation of the ‘racism concept’ was primarily concerned with attributing the epithet racism to Nazism’s mobilizations and representations of race that degraded and violated white populations in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s.

The appropriation of the ‘racism concept’ by a Black sociology in the late 1960s – early 1970 meant its supplementation and modification by analyses of colonialism and white supremacy that the initializing western foundation of the ‘racism concept’ exempted and foreclosed. This is described as the alterity of the racism concept. Finally, the lecture discusses these conceptual and political implications in terms of the analytical frontiers that established antagonisms between white and Black sociologies during the 1970s

Above are abstracts, or descriptions of what I attended today. These descriptions were given by the institution, persons of knowledge not by me.

Very briefly things that struck with me today were:

  • Poststructuralism
  • Postmodernism
  • The idea that ‘Feminism’, the ‘Female’ or ‘Woman’ is a juridicial categorisation
  • That to challenge the notions that you ‘could define or be defined as what one is not’, you have to unpick what the normative definition is. OR you could just reject that entirely
  • “The Governance of Race” or “Race Governance”
  • I must start formulating questions for my dissertation topic(s)
  • I must decide my dissertation topic.
  • The area of my idea must be constituted or re-constituted in questions or framings that could help me address what I WANT to DO. NOT what I SHOULD DO.
  • Life is complicated and hard
  • I tend to write poetry to just vomit out my thoughts, feelings and to show some form or daily writing.
  • THAT I SHOULD use this blog and my uptake of #NaBloPoMo to actually use writing in order to communicate wider ideas and my existence

Post Patricia Hills Collins’ Rough notes.

So I missed a couple day’s posts, which I am kicking myself over. But I guess that’s what happens when life gets in the way of passion, and learning that gets marked and becomes valued takes over invisible past-times like this that increasingly seen as having no value (again).

Hopefully tomorrow, or soon, I will post up a finished essay. My first in two years and in submitting it today I am 1/16th closer to graduating with an MA.

Depending on whether I can or not, I will post it up on here. This obviously depends on whether I might fail if I shared my work on the interweb. But in the meantime I wants to share my very, very, very rough notes on Patricia Hill Collin’s book Black Feminist Thought. True, it’s not so much an essay than methodological book review on a book 25 years old. But hopefully these notes interest you and lead you to reach the book, or my review once I upload it.

My Notes:

1990 book


‘I felt that is was important to examine the complexity of ideas that exist in both scholarly and everyday life and present those ideas in a way that made them not less powerful or rigorous but accessible’ (p. xii)

She is firstly challenging the ‘hierarchies of privilege’ addressing her won as well in order to present new ideas, in a variety of different forms and methods. As the ideas are more important to them that the way in which academia addresses, categorises or reflects on them.

‘Secondly [she] ‘place[s] Black women’s experiences and ideas at the centre of analysis’ (xii)

‘Thirdly, [she] deliberately include[s] numerous quotations from a range of African-American women thinkers, some well known and others rarely heard from.’ (xiii)

She wants to ground her analysis, her academically structured reflection of her insight through grounding in ‘multiple voices’ to ‘highlight the diversity, richness and power of Black women’s ideas as part of a long-standing African-American women’s intellectual community’ (xiii)

‘Fourth, I used a distinctive methodology is preparing this manuscript which illustrate how thought and action can work together in generating theory.’ (xiii)

Fifth, she knowingly edited the picture, some could say biasedly, in order to clear away the contradictions, frictions and inconsistencies in Black Feminist Thought, but she did it so that Black Feminist Thought could be embedded in the political and  intellectual context that challenges its very right to exist’ . (xiv)

CHAPTER 1: The Politics of Black Feminist Thought

‘My overall goal in this book is to describe, analyze, explain the significance of, and generally further the development of Black feminist thought.’ ( 16)

She does this by ‘summariz[ing] some of the essential themes in Black feminist thought’ (16) or in other words:

She primarily paints a hegemonic summary of key ‘essential themes’ of Black feminist thought (16)

Her second objective is to consider and make space for ‘selected negative themes currently lacking in a comprehensive Black feminist analysis’. Particularly the interconnective convergent role of race, gender and class oppression and it’s impact on these topics that range from ‘rape, sterilisation abuse and sexual harassment’. I think she does this quite well, key in this is her analysis of White women slave owners and their role as oppressed oppressors with abusive tendencies towards black women (chapters …)

Third objective is ‘to develop an epistemological framework that can be used to both assess existing Black feminist thought and to clarify some of the underlying assumptions that impede the development of Black feminist thought’ (17)

Finally, she utilises this framework herself in the very volume she is creating to develop/present the techniques. Explored in Chapter 2 and 9, Collins states. But also by using the framework she presents herself as a societal subject who is following another tradition of Black women intellectuals which is to use their status as ‘situated knowers’ to utilise experience in expressing a standpoint. (17)

CHAPTER 2: Defining Black Feminist Thought

‘Black feminist thought aims to develop a theory that is emancipatory and reflective and which can aid African-American women’s struggles against oppression.

…expanded definition of standpoint, the relationship between everyday and specialised thought, and the importance of rearticulation as one key dimension of Black feminist thought’.

‘This specialized thought should aim to infuse Black women’s experiences and everyday thought with new meaning by rearticulating the interdependence of Black women’s experiences and consciousness.’ (32)

Simply meaning that the method used cannot be applied in an objective positivist tradition, but one that positions each unique facet and stream of conscious in Black women’s experience but more importantly their interconnective nature.

p.39 NOTE

Important ending. Reads as a historiographical accounts of reference and literature. But not one as a chronological continuum. Not one framed by just historical timings and context but as a sociological responses and lived experiences.
Language is also a little all-encompassing “humanist”, “women and men”, “white women and black men and white men”, feature a lot.
Tone a little self conscious?
Halting not too confident? Wonder if the same in the second edition?


CHAPTER 3: Work, Family, and Black Women’s Oppression


Strong quotation from literature and literary relevant figures ie. Zora Neale, Audrey Lourde and Alice Walker.
Perhaps attempt to legitimise and academically reference Black women thought and ideas hitherto unreflected upon within a larger context?

P.60 NOTEs

Would be interesting to see how this retelling and re-situating of Marxist economics and capital is retold in 2nd edition. ?
language and tone?
Here seems a bit simplistic. Too clinical in language Direct paraphrasing of word like ‘In particular, the middle class dominates labor and is itself subordinate to capital’ (p.60)

CHAPTER 4: Mammies, Matriarch, and Other Controlling Images


B.Hooks – more direct. Lyrical. Defined/Defining in clear subjective/objective terms making the lived clear and apparent. Is she better?

Is/Can we argue Collins is a naive attempt at situating all Black knowledge. Past lived truths in a self-contained, and more palpable tongue for academia.
Softly highlighted. Empirically backed up and reasoned but with no room for manoeuvre or action going forward considered?


Black women creativity and transformative despite oppositions, utilising of bits and pieces allowed to her, by society into work of functional beauty.  (Christy 🙂 ?? or Quilting??

Afrocentric -re-evaluating new value judgment phrase re-positioned at fore of Collins argument.

Afrocentric – notions of diversity is communal, and functional beauty.

Something derived by/denied to British Muslims in UK – Dissertation

CHAPTER 5: The Power of Self-definition

‘“In order to survive, those of us for whom oppression is as American as apple pie have always had to be watchers,” asserts Black feminist poet Audre Lorde (“Sister outsider”; 1984, 114). This “watching: generates a dual consciousness in African-American women, one in which Black women “become familiar with the language and manners of the oppressor, even sometimes adopting them for some illusion of protection (.114), while hiding a self-denned standpoint from the prying eyes of dominant groups. (p.91)

_just thought is PHC’s book a response to Lourde’s Sister outsider?


Perfect Opening. Especially for Dissertation.
For Essay – Has/ Is Collins guilty of this dual conscious? In what/ To what extent is it apparent here in first edition? Is it still there this naivety of unconfident, ideological communication?


Always harkens back to phrase ‘de mule uh de world”.
Is this the take home point in light of all qualitative interview data? Also lists other engaged in similar thought in past ‘Audre Lourde, Ella Surrey, Maria Stewart, Fannie Barrier Williams, and Marita Bonner’

– however Lourde’s (Sister outsider) rejects rejection of difference and placing emphasis on concentrated ignorance, imitation of dominant and eradication of the subordinate difference But rather to acknowledge our differences but more importantly examine how they are separating us. (Sister outsider, year, 115)

Was Audre Lourde better at being less divisive? Or is PHC beginning the post-structuralist approach by examining her own site of lived knowledge and dismantling the differences, domination and erosion of Black Feminist ideals?

Interesting point – suppression of ideas that do exist in last paragraph on page 93. That fewer black women idea’s exist in literature is not indication of their existence but rather the suppression of ideas that could exist. The relative lack of other voices,
Has Collins broken the ceiling? IS she paving the path? Has she highlighted/called out publishers and academia? GO HER!

P.107 NOTE

“Strong mothers are threatening because they contradict elite while male definition of femininity” (p.107)

Matriarchs maligned in scholarship and popular media, basic ideas in ideology of domination.
Emphasis Black Feminist Thinkers place on respect. No-one respects us. Admonish each other to have self-respect and demand respect of others.

Walker phrase. V. Important – Blog! – Photoshop? p.107.

“But please remember, especially in these times of group-think and the right-on chorus, that no person is your friend (or kin) who demands your silence, or denies your right to grow and be perceived as fully blossomed as you were intended. Or who belittles in any fashion the gifts you labour so to bring into the world.” (Walker, 1983, 36)

In that sense is Collins more inclusive? Not just for the domain of the creatives and the already engaged black women?

CHAPTER 6: Black Women and Motherhood

P.118 NOTE

Becoming more confident in tone and content.

Bringing to mind the ‘Politics’ in title.
This book is more of a political review/argument/manifesto (?? – can’t read own writing)

Yes. It is sprinkled with epistemological standpoint(s), statements and phrases that within the wider content of the chapter are validated with examples. But Collins leaves many more questions than she answers. Perhaps this is the hook? The hook to bring you in and help empower you by re-satisfying black, women, feminist and white and elite feminist curiosities?
Due to accessibility in language and sentence construct?

p.136 NOTE

Ends w/Alice Walker. Some Originality in this chapter.
Chronicling the time-elemental relationship, judgement values of Black Motherhood. Anthropological/Ethnographic.

CHAPTER 7: Rethinking Black Women’s Activism

“Survival” key theme of book in respect to Black Women Cultures.

Re-positioning the ordinary in these heralded already as extra-ordinary.
Everyday women ie. Sara Brooks (p.140) as activists. Brings the political feminist and especially the intersectional feminist agendas to the realm of the lived experience and small site of action.
As such can argue that book and Collins is leading us to question our exclusionary/inclusionry practices. Even in the Black Academic, Political and Activist circles.
New thought  and action is more necessary ever now. It is all an amalgamation of inherited truths and values.

CHAPTER 7: Rethinking Black Women’s Activism

P.153 NOTE

Lerner 1972.

List of all Black Woman organisations – established activists. All already known and existed well before. Perhaps even many more by 1990.
However this one ties to clearly illustrate my hypothesis that Collins is a chronicler. That in stating all facets of the lived and inherited lives of Black women in a wider framework?!?!

P.157 NOTE

Clear distinction of difference and challenge to Status Quo and ways of reading in White Eurocentric = recall the past and …. cant read writing.

Dr. King – Church – Religion – Leadership. White Hierarchy?

P.158 – Note

Gender Distinction, Men Spokesperson. Women Centreperson. = Invisibility in public discourse, and silencing. But also appropriate platforms of worth.

CHAPTER 8: The Sexual Politics of Black Womanhood

P.170 NOTE

V. Intersting point. Well argued. Link Pornography to slavery, specially in regard to black women. .

White women as objects. Black women as animals. Meaning ‘white women become creations of culture’ the mind of white men, thereby an extension of their natures, their reasoned mind. The black women ‘receive no such redeeming dose of culture and remain open to the type of exploitation visited on nature overall’,


Chapter 10: Toward an Afrocentric Feminist Epistemology

P.202 NOTE

Collins justifying self as consciously embedding self as ethno/auto/chronicling/archivist
-But archivist would mean more inclusion of dates?! or emphasis on them.

Epistemological privilege highlighted also.

=Maybe this then is why success of this book is so vast. Different spheres. Cross-academic appeal. Cross generational, cross cultural, cross production also. History too.

P.204 NOTE

Highlight the inequalities in being “called out” so to speak. For epistemological stand point.


P.210 NOTE

Is Collins advancing a new methodological framework or is it one already inherent in her being a woman also? Uses empathy and uses first-hand observation and situating herself in experiences of other people. In this case a whole diaspora of Black, American, Afro-centric, Lesbian, Women? Mothers?

P.219 NOTE

Alternative epistemology – assessing knowledge claims.
Belief/Adherance to positivism suggested,
————— She called me out!! What??! ——————

Alternative framework epistemology. Did she knowingly engage, recreate or carve out a space for her/this archival/ experience-based epistemological standpoint? Therefore is she original? Original in methods but not in thoughts? in ideas? The very thing she wanted to be original in. Or cares about. But the idea of the application is a composite and then a fully thought framework also.

CHAPTER 11: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment.

P.227 NOTE

Challenging, resisting of oppression on all alternative three lines.spheres (race, class and gender) through this book. But then adds on that Black feminist thought different a little more as it ‘reveals insights ..along other axes such as religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and age’ (227)

Also, 2nd edition she includes /more preface or intro

Situating herself in her experiences to allow herself to be validated – standpoint theory?

My day

By taking away my only companionship,
You ostracised me,
I was alone and vulnerable today,
Emotional and ill,
Stressed to the hilt,
Saddened beyond belief,
Could you not see?
Surely as a determined fellow woman,
My gendered mirror in this unclear ether,
You should be able to see me here.

Ask my name,
Wonder from where I came?
Genuinely and deeply,
not merely for the sake of externals’ auditing,
I have a life you know,
Feelings and thoughts within me run a deep and vast course,
But here it seems it is not the case,
I am but a coloured, vacant, emptied suitcase,
A younger model who holds no acknowledgement in your face.